Australian Amateur Brewing Championship 2007

[GMK]

Thanks Chris. It's good to see that someone outside the group can understand and sympathise.

UPDATE: Some dedicated volunteers pulled together tonight and went through judging the last category. Stay tuned.

GMK, I did help judge the Barley Wines. I remember one that was Oakey, but we don't see any names on the beers, so I can't even give you a hint of how you scored, as I don't know.

That was not the intent - but i hope mine was the Oakey One

 

[PostModern]

That was not the intent - but i hope mine was the Oakey One

I'll be willing to bet it was the oakey one

 

[Stuster]

Great post, Chris. :super:

 

[Ray_Mills]

Results
http://ibunion.org/
Cheers
Ray

 

[Duff]

<sever rant waring>

After lurking on this thread for some time and holding my tongue, after have a few tonight I can no longer hold back.

I disagree with previous posters saying now is not the time and this is not the place.

We're all pissed off and feed up ... and we want answers ... who's to blame. Lets light the torches and get marching.

Now lets see, a bunch of volunteers put up there hand to organise our fine national competition, and for some reason it seems to all go pear shaped.

Results are not out the nano-second we want them so it easy isn't, we just blame them. We'll just whinge and complain and snipe until we have torn them down to size and "got it off our chests". That will solve it!

But wait, they are volunteers, who have taken this on in good faith, and they are trying to do the right thing by making sure all the flights are judged properly (I know by now I would be tempted to cut some corners for the sake of getting it over with).

... and they can't really be blamed for John Winston Howard calling an election on the same day (guess we have already taken care of that problem )

... so what is the real problem here

well lets see, X number of flights to judge and much less then X x 3 judges ... hmmm ... OMG, not enough available judges! How could that be? Not enough judges!

So here's the crux of it. After being involved in several competitions now, it seems to almost always comes down to not enough judges.

People go on and on about the crap quality of there feedback, the time it takes to get results back, the poor organisiation blah blah blah.

Well I say don't get angry, get even. Come and make sure its done properly. Come and watch and learn how its done. You don't have to be a champion brewer to judge.

Come and help steward.

Offer to be a fourth non scoring judge if you really are not sure, but just come and participate.

Until we have more people involved in this process we will always be having these problems. Sure the comp has not been run perfectly, but which one is? But if they had a bigger pool to draw upon we would never be in this situation.

As an aside, I have to say that judging is a fantastic way of broadening your brewing experience. You will come across some of the best of beers and some of the worst of beers.

You also have a group of dedicated individuals that have so much knowledge to learn from, and in judging the gloves are off. Its none of that ***** footing around pretending that the beer is ok when you really just want to spit it out.

Don't know your diacytel from your acetic acid? Wouldn't know a phenol if it jumped and bit you on the arse? Well by the end of judging a couple of sessions you know all this and more.

So the what is the REAL problem here? The one that we can all do something about to FIX the situation? We are the problem, and we are also the solution. Get off your arse and get involved, so that next time you won't have to be fretting about the time it takes for a competition to be run.

</sever rant waring>

Quoted so people can read it again.

Bravo.

 

[Fatgodzilla]

<sever rant waring>

:angry: :angry:

</sever rant waring>

Yeh CT - you said a few things I've would have liked to have said over the past weeks but was being very diplomatic by avoiding. See you in Melbourne in 2008 at the convention / nationals

:beerbang:

 

[///]

We can look at what went wrong for this particular comp or we can consider what is wrong with a historical perspective with the (dis)organisation of the AABC/AABA.

Unfortunately much of what is wrong with the AABC/AABA as an organisation has one simple cause - Power.

Nothing has changed in the last 8 or so years, my faith therefore is not strong....

Scotty

 

[mikem108]

Bloody pace of life, technology, internet etc. has made everyone so impatient these days, people all want answers NOW NOW NOW and I'm sick of it. It happens to me at work all the time. People send emails and if they are not answered immediately they'll phone you, leave a voice mail and whilst you are listening to their voice mail and trying to type an response to the email they'll be phoning again :angry:

Sometimes its just better to sit back "zen" out and not sweat it, take a deep breath "relax and have a homebrew"

 

[andrewg]

Great post, Chris. :super:

As other have said, fantastic post Chris. Apart from the occasional entry into the comps and recognising that these events must be a massive undertaking for the volunteer organisers, I was blissfully unaware of the the shortage of judges for comps. I would be more than happy to get involved - and would even consider doing the BJCP if there was a course in Melbourne.

I had no probs in waiting for results and was pleasantly surprised when they were posted yesterday - BTW congrats to you too!
cheers
HaigStBrewery

 

[Ross]

Yes, it was a good post by Chris & hopefully brewers will take action & start getting involved.
We certainly are up in Brizzy.

But I wonder how many actually read this thread, with all the unnecessary crap that's been hurled around.
NO-ONE complained about the time taken to get the results out, infact there was total support for taking time & getting it right - The ONLY complaints came from lack of feedback & that could so easily have been avoided...

Anyway, back to brewing


Cheers Ross

 

[andrewg]

BTW congrats to you too!
cheers
HaigStBrewery

You, as in Chris Taylor - well done!
cheers
HaigStBrewery

 

[Paul H]

The true tragedy will be if nothing is learnt from this experience.

I suspect that there is more at play in this instance than would appear & that some individuals have become "Bitter & Twisted".

I would suggest those that believe they are interested in what's best for the craft evaluate their actions.

I also urge people to think before rushing forward & offering their services as a volunteer steward or judge, remember you are making a firm committment. Organisers of competitions rely on the good faith of volunteers to effectively run these activities.

If you have a habit of being half-arsed in following through with your committments then don't bother offering your services. Organisers need to recognise these potential issues before they become problems.

Lastly I object to people using "volunteer" as a get out of jail card when things don't go well. If you committ to doing something then you ARE responsible. I find it remarkable that when things go well there's no shortage of posts backslapping & smoke blowing organisers but the minute things turn bad there's the "don't blame me I'm just a volunteer" post, with several more back slapping posts for the "victim".

 

[Fatgodzilla]

Agree with Paul H on all but the following

Lastly I object to people using "volunteer" as a get out of jail card when things don't go well. If you committ to doing something then you ARE responsible. I find it remarkable that when things go well there's no shortage of posts backslapping & smoke blowing organisers but the minute things turn bad there's the "don't blame me I'm just a volunteer" post, with several more back slapping posts for the "victim".

No one hid behind the "volunteer" label to avoid responsibility. The "we are extremely F#*&ing busy at the moment so will finish the job when we can, please have patience and we will get (all) the results out as soon as we can" was what was said.

It was all the people defending the said busy people who played the "volunteer" card. I thank them most sincerely for their support.

 

[///]

The true tragedy will be if nothing is learnt from this experience.

I suspect that there is more at play in this instance than would appear & that some individuals have become "Bitter & Twisted".

Maybe less bitter and more tired at the record getting stuck in one place every year. Well thats my perspective, with some of the new delegates involved for next year I have no doubt change will occur. I hope so....

Being involved in comps for the last few years the pleasing thing is the advance in quality of the beers as a whole. No doubt aussie brewers are stepping up the quality and all the brewers should be congratulated for getting to the Nationals and again for the place getters. The rest of the business needs to follow the entrants lead.

Scotty

 

[etbandit]

Congrats to place getters, organisers, judges and stewards!

Wondering if Full Results are available?

 

[Fatgodzilla]

Congrats to place getters, organisers, judges and stewards!

Wondering if Full Results are available?

Yes. Full results of who came first, second and third.

The rest .. will get there score papers and if they wish to publish the comments and score, they are quite welcome to. But no, the scores of those who did not get a placing will not be published on any site anywhere. EOS.

On behalf of organisers, judges and stewards thank you etbandit for your kind words.

 

[bconnery]

Yes. Full results of who came first, second and third.

The rest .. will get there score papers and if they wish to publish the comments and score, they are quite welcome to. But no, the scores of those who did not get a placing will not be published on any site anywhere. EOS.

On behalf of organisers, judges and stewards thank you etbandit for your kind words.

I have a question, and let me state right from the beginning I am after clarification and in no way looking to pass judgement or intentionally stir the pot, even though I get the feeling that has the potential to happen.
This also isn't necessarily a question for fatgodzilla, even though I am replying to his post...(Although if you know the answer FG feel free )
Is the decision to not post all results a decision in the hands of the state body running the comp, and I believe NSW makes it clear they never will publish beyond places, and that is fine, or is this a change in the practise of the AABC? In previous years, at least since 1999, the full results have been published.
This may have even been outlined in the rule changes, aims etc of the AABC and I've missed it...
I don't have an issue if the answer is that it is up to NSW, and they choose not to, I don't have an issue if the AABC says we now don't, I'd just like to know...

I'll also admit that I am totally motivated by extreme stickybeakiness when I ask this question even though FG said end of story...

 

[bigfridge]

I have a question ...

Is the decision to not post all results a decision in the hands of the state body running the comp

bconnery,

From my reading of the rules the AABA does not seem to have any requirement to list the positions of all competitors.

"D6. Judging. ... Completed judging/score sheets will be
returned to the brewers within three weeks of completion of judging."

"D11. Privacy. Personal information (names, addresses, and other contact details, etc)
provided by brewers on the entry form will only be used for the conduct of the competition.
This information will not be released to third parties, other than the names of brewers, which
will be published in the results lists for the competition."

So the only reference that I can see to the release of results is to get them back to the entrants within 3 weeks (note that this is 3 weeks from the END of judging, not the START) and that 'results lists' will be published - but the rules do not define if this is the full set of results or just the placegetters.

Where the rules do not cover the situation for each competition, rule D7 allows the local organising committee to make up its own rules:

"C7. AABC Decisions. Where it is necessary for the successful running of the AABC, the
local organising committee is authorised to make decisions on issues not previously agreed
upon by the AABA. Such decisions should be guided by the other AABC rules, the Aims of
the AABA and, where possible, the views of other AABA delegates."

In this case I would say that the organising committee (ie Ray) is so exhausted and behind with all his other private affairs that this rule has been applied.

David

 

[Paul H]

bconnery,

From my reading of the rules the AABA does not seem to have any requirement to list the positions of all competitors.

"D6. Judging. ... Completed judging/score sheets will be
returned to the brewers within three weeks of completion of judging."

"D11. Privacy. Personal information (names, addresses, and other contact details, etc)
provided by brewers on the entry form will only be used for the conduct of the competition.
This information will not be released to third parties, other than the names of brewers, which
will be published in the results lists for the competition."

So the only reference that I can see to the release of results is to get them back to the entrants within 3 weeks (note that this is 3 weeks from the END of judging, not the START) and that 'results lists' will be published - but the rules do not define if this is the full set of results or just the placegetters.

Where the rules do not cover the situation for each competition, rule D7 allows the local organising committee to make up its own rules:

"C7. AABC Decisions. Where it is necessary for the successful running of the AABC, the
local organising committee is authorised to make decisions on issues not previously agreed
upon by the AABA. Such decisions should be guided by the other AABC rules, the Aims of
the AABA and, where possible, the views of other AABA delegates."

In this case I would say that the organising committee (ie Ray) is so exhausted and behind with all his other private affairs that this rule has been applied.

David

Firstly I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on television but the way I interpret the rules.

C7 would be applied where the rules are silent, however D11 makes it clear what information will be collected, what information will be kept confidential & specifically excludes brewers names "which will be published in the results lists for the competition."

As it is not necessary for the successful running of the competition & the rules are not silent on the publishing of names I find it hard for the organisers to rely on C7, even if one were to be exhausted.

 

[bconnery]

I found all that info but was left with the same conclusion. It appears that it is up to the state body, as the "results list" line could be interpreted to mean only the placegetters in my book.

Anyways as I said, I was just after clarification and being nosy, it isn't really that important in the grand scheme of things, although it might be to some.

Id tell myself to relax and have a homebrew but I'm not worried, so I'll just have a homebrew instead